Max Fawcett Of The National Observer Is Over Wrought About The Notwithstanding Clause of The Charter—As If It Was Somehow Wrong

Obviously Mr Fawcett knows not the history.

Without the Notwithstanding Clause there would be no Charter at all. No rights and freedoms , no amending formula, no Aboriginal definition , no equalization guarantee etc——-

And his extreme concern over a Federal Parliament’s use of it is just alarmism. Since 1982 the Federal Parliament has not used this clause once —-zero—as he even admits but quoting just one professor , Errol Mendes of the University of Ottawa , if a Federal  Parliament used it now it ‘would open the floodgates to even further abuses of it by the provinces———.’

But the Provinces have already used it ——-in Ontario, Quebec , and Saskatchewan as he also admits. It was not necessary for the Federal Parliament to use it for the Provinces to avail of that option. And they did and no doubt will again.

It will be a Parliament not a Government that uses the clause. And hence will entail Parliamentary debate ——-and if passed is valid for five years. To extend,  it must go through the same parliamentary process again.

Fawcett is one of those fear mongers on the Charter who has a national stage from which to pontificate.

The notwithstanding clause is as legitimate as any other clause of the Charter, Mr. Fawcett’s denigration.  ——-ah—’ notwithstanding.’

Of course, if Fawcett and his ilk want to change the clause , there is a process ——ironically made possible by the Charter  —the amending formula.

Hon A. Brian Peckford P.C.

Last Surviving First  Minister Whose Signature Is On The Charter’s  Founding Document.